Promotion 451
logically be rather different, and hence the
criteria of effectiveness.
One might expect that these theoretical
shortcomings would by now have invalidated
the hierarchy of effects as a framework for the
measurement of effectiveness, but all the evi-
dence is that they have gone unremarked in
practice. Therefore, it is necessary to recognize
that AIDA and its kin will remain the implicit
conceptual underpinning of present-day prac-
tice until marketing academics are able to
produce a better model which practitioners
can understand and are willing to use. Evi-
dence that this state of affairs remained a pipe
dream during the past decade is to be found
in two authoritative reviews commissioned by
the Advertising Association (McDonald, 1992;
Frantzen, 1994).
If there is to be any real progress towards
a better, workable model during the next
decade, and hence towards more reliable
measurement of effectiveness, the impetus will
have to come from the ‘planning’ discipline
within advertising agencies. This is the intel-
lectual wing of the business, staffed by people
with a lively interest in understanding con-
sumer behaviour and applying its principles
to the development of effective communica-
tion strategies. Their ‘house journal’, Admap,
bridges the gap between academics and
practitioners.
Understanding the context
Thoughtful practitioners of any discipline
should want to understand the economic,
social and cultural context within which they
operate. Those with responsibility for deploy-
ment of the promotional mix needto, for theirs
is an overtly persuasive and very public activ-
ity. Therefore, this chapter concludes by exam-
ining the relevant attitudes of policy formers
and opinion leaders in Britain, reporting Brit-
ish public opinion and outlining the domestic
regulatory system. Inevitably, the focus will be
on advertising rather than the less high-profile
elements of the promotional mix.
To place these external views in a proper
context, it will help to bear in mind these
relevant characteristics of the social and eco-
nomic environment in which contemporary
promotional initiatives take place: A highly developed consumer economy, in
which advertising bridges the gap between
producers and consumers.
Well-educated and fairly sophisticated
consumers.
Articulate consumer pressure groups.
A highly sophisticated promotional business.
Consumer protection legislation.
Formal statutory control over broadcast
advertising.
Self-regulatory codes of practice relating to
non-broadcast advertising, sales promotion and
direct marketing.Marketing academics and practitioners often
find themselves having to defend the economics
of promotion. As an occasional paper from the
Advertising Association comments:The normal progression is for someone to
suggest the use of advertising exercises an
unhealthy influence on some desirable eco-
nomic function, whereupon defenders cast
doubt upon the logic and/or the evidence of the
original argument. This usually develops into
an increasingly esoteric debate, whose details
can be understood by hardly anybody.
(Lind, 1998, p. 18)The debate in question tends to focus on four
charges, typically levelled at advertising in
particular: that it is a costthat drives up the
price of the product; that it sets up barriersto
the entry of new competitors into the market,
and thereby reduces choice; that its appealsare
emotional, not rational; that it has the powerto
make people want things they don’t need, and
thereby artificially distorts spending patterns.
Defenders respond that: it can stimulate
demand and thereby hold price rises in check;